Advertisement

Formal Verification of Avionics Software Products

  • Jean Souyris
  • Virginie Wiels
  • David Delmas
  • Hervé Delseny
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5850)

Abstract

This paper relates an industrial experience in the field of formal verification of avionics software products. Ten years ago we presented our very first technological research results in [18]. What was just an idea plus some experimental results at that time is now an industrial reality. Indeed, since 2001, Airbus has been integrating several tool supported formal verification techniques into the development process of avionics software products. Just like all aspects of such processes, the use of formal verification techniques must comply with DO-178B [9] objectives and Airbus has been a pioneer in this domain.

Keywords

avionics software safety development process verification formal verification Abstract Interpretation static analysis 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    The ASTREE project (Analyse Statique de logiciels Temps-REel Embarqués). RNTL (2003), http://www.di.ens.fr/~cousot/projets/ASTREE/
  2. 2.
    The CAT project (C analysis toolbox). RNTL (2005) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cousot, P., Cousot, R., Feret, J., Mauborgne, L., Miné, A., Monniaux, D., Rival, X.: The ASTRÉE analyser. In: Sagiv, M. (ed.) ESOP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3444, pp. 21–30. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cousot, P., Cousot, R.: Basic Concepts of Abstract Interpretation. In: Jacquard, R. (ed.) Building the Information Society, pp. 359–366. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    DAEDALUS project. IST-1999-20527 of the european IST Programme of the Fifth Framework Programme (FP5) on the « validation of software components embedded in future generation critical concurrent systems by exhaustive semantic-based static analysis and abstract testing methods based on abstract interpretation » (DAEDALUS lasted from October 1st, 2000 to September 30th 2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Delmas, D., Goubault, E., Putot, S., Souyris, J., Tekkal, K., Védrine, F.: Towards an industrial use of FLUCTUAT on safety-critical avionics software. In: Alpuente, M., Cook, B., Joubert, C. (eds.) FMICS 2009. LNCS, vol. 5825, pp. 53–69. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Delmas, D., Souyris, J.: ASTRÉE: From research to industry. In: Riis Nielson, H., Filé, G. (eds.) SAS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4634, pp. 437–451. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dijkstra, E.W.: A discipline of programming; automatic Computation. Prentice Hall Int., Englewood Cliffs (1976)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    DO-178B/ED-12B. Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification. RTCA/EUROCAE (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Duprat, S., Souyris, J., Favre-Félix, D.: Formal verification workbench for avionics software. In: SIA (ed.) European Congress ERTS 2006 (European Real Time Software). R-2006-01-2A2 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Ferdinand, C., Heckmann, R., Langenbach, M., Martin, F., Schmidt, M., Theiling, H., Thesing, S., Wilhelm, R.: Reliable and precise WCET determination for a real life processor. In: Henzinger, T.A., Kirsch, C.M. (eds.) EMSOFT 2001. LNCS, vol. 2211, pp. 469–485. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hayhurst, K.J., Veerhusen, D.S., Chilenski, J.J., Rierson, L.K.: A practical tutorial on Modified Condition/Decision Coverage. NASA/TM-2001-210876 (2001)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Hoare, C.A.R.: An axiomatic basis for computer programming. Communication of the ACM 12(10) (October 1969)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    The Institute of Electrical and Inc Electronics Engineers. IEEE standard for binary floating-point arithmetic. Technical Report ANSI/IEEE Std 745. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (1985)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leroy, X.: The Compcert verified compiler, software and commented proof (August 2008), http://compcert.inria.fr/
  18. 18.
    Randimbivololona, F., Souyris, J., Baudin, P., Pacalet, A., Raguideau, J., Schoen, D.: Applying Formal Proof Techniques to Avionics Software: A Pragmatic Approach. In: Woodcock, J.C.P., Davies, J., Wing, J.M. (eds.) FM 1999. LNCS, vol. 1709, pp. 1798–1815. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rival, X.: Symbolic Transfer Functions-based Approaches to Certified Compilation. In: 31st Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages (POPL 2004), Venice. ACM, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Souyris, J., Delmas, D.: Experimental assessment of astrée on safety-critical avionics software. In: Saglietti, F., Oster, N. (eds.) SAFECOMP 2007. LNCS, vol. 4680, pp. 479–490. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Souyris, J., Favre-Felix, D.: Proof of properties in avionics. In: IFIP Congress Topical Sessions 2004, pp. 527–536 (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Souyris, J., Le Pavec, E., Himbert, G., Jégu, V., Borios, G., Heckmann, R.: Computing the worst case execution time of an avionics program by abstract interpretation. In: 5th Intl. Workshop on Worst-Case Execution Time (WCET) Analysis, pp. 21–24 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
    Projet 2005 THÉSÉE du RNTL (Réseau National des Technologies Logicielles) de l’ANRGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Projet 2008 U3CAT de l’Agence nationale de la recherche (ANR)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Souyris
    • 1
  • Virginie Wiels
    • 2
  • David Delmas
    • 1
  • Hervé Delseny
    • 1
  1. 1.Airbus France S.A.S.TOULOUSE Cedex 9France
  2. 2.Onera / DTIMToulouse cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations